Tag: the war of terror

How 9/11 Bred a ‘War on Terror’ From Hell

On September 11th, 22 years later, what are we to make of it all? Who even remembers that, as the Pentagon burned, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld picked up a scrap of hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 from the smoking ruins of that building. Soon after, he would tell his aides (as one of them scribbled down): “Near term target needs – go massive – sweep it all up, things related and not.” That “and not” meant, among other matters, Saddam Hussein, the autocratic ruler of Iraq who had been a Rumsfeld target before 9/11 ever happened.

Of course, the invasion of Afghanistan came first, but that “or not” arrived in the spring of 2003 and the rest is the worst and saddest sort of history imaginable. In a sense, so much should have been so obvious so fast. After all, within days of those suicide attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney was already swearing that al-Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden would face the “full wrath” of American military might and Rumsfeld was making it clear that such wrath could involve “a large multi-headed effort that probably spans 60 countries.”

Keep reading

22 Years of Drone Warfare and No End in Sight

In a June 2012 piece headlined “Praying at the Church of St. Drone,” I wrote, “Be assured of one thing: whichever candidate you choose at the polls in November, you aren’t just electing a president of the United States; you are also electing an assassin-in-chief.” At that time, President Barack Obama was overseeing what came to be known as “terror Tuesday” weekly meetings in the White House Situation Room with more than 100 national security types, some by “secure video teleconference,” gathering to discuss global assassination targets in America’s never-ending war on terror.

Unlike once upon a time, however, the “assassins” to be dispatched were no longer human, but “unmanned aerial aircraft,” or drones. And they struck across significant parts of the planet, sometimes killing al-Qaeda figures, but all too often, civilians and even children. Drone operators were, in fact, allowed to kill based on nothing more than what was called “patterns of suspicious behavior” and their planes were “roughly thirty times more likely to result in a civilian fatality than an airstrike by a manned aircraft.”

As I wrote then:

“In the [New York] Times telling, the organization of robotic killing had become the administration’s idée fixe, a kind of cult of death within the Oval Office, with those involved in it being so many religious devotees. Of course, thought about another way, that ‘terror Tuesday’ scene might not be from a monastery or a church synod, but from a Mafia council directly out of a Mario Puzo novel, with the president as the Godfather, designating ‘hits’ in a rough-and-tumble world.

“How far we’ve come in just two presidencies!  Assassination as a way of life has been institutionalized in the Oval Office, thoroughly normalized, and is now being offered to the rest of us as a reasonable solution to American global problems and an issue on which to run a presidential campaign.”

Yes, foreign assassination attempts were hardly unknown in previous American history, but they were usually left to the CIA and there was nothing machine-like about them. In this century, it’s been different indeed, whether the targets were unknown figures considered suspicious (from an automated distance) or, as in the case of Donald Trump, whose administration upped such strikes, all too well known, as with the drone assassination of Major General Qassem Suleimani, the leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force, on his arrival at Baghdad International Airport on a visit to Iraq.

As Maha Hilal, author of Innocent Until Proven Muslim: Islamophobia, the War on Terror, and the Muslim Experience Since 9/11, reports today, President Biden has, after a fashion, reined in the Trumpian version of drone assassination, but he, like the three presidents before him, still remains America’s assassin-in-chief.  With that in mind, consider what such a world looks like to those potentially on the other side of a drone’s missiles.

Keep reading

ISIS are back…and they’re faker than ever.

In just the last few days ISIS – Islamic State or ISIL or Da’esh or whatever – have hit the headlines in publications from all over the world. A strong resurgence for a narrative that’s been more than quiet for the last few years.

To do a quick recap, when last we heard from our cartoonish black-flagged head-choppers they were telling their suicide bombers to “steer clear of coronavirus-stricken Europe”.

An announcement that, pre-“pandemic”, would have been among the silliest headlines I’ve ever read…but in a post-Covid world it probably barely scrapes the top twenty.

Either way, that marked a hiatus for ISIS, an exit from the world stage as the “war on terror” made way for the “war on Covid”. In fact, a “reduction in violent terror events” was even sold as a potential plus-side of lockdowns, according to a study done by Yale.

…but now here we are. Three years on, and ISIS is back with a bang, or rather several bangs. Like a balaclava-wearing bear, they’ve emerged from their hibernation feeling grumpy.

The mainstream started laying the ground work for it back in January/February, with the aforementioned Yale study and then US politicians suddenly warning that ISIS was a “simmering powder keg” and underlining that the War on Terror is not over.

Then the US started nailing “senior ISIS leaders”, offing two in two weeks in April and a third in July. Syria got in on the act too, dropping an ISIS leader of their own.

Through the summer, ISIS “affiliates” claimed responsibility for attacks in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Uganda. These were followed with more “the war on terror is not over” messaging.

But things have really started to heat up the last few days.

On August 11th CBS reported that ISIS were behind an ambush in Syria, killing 20 Syrian soldiers.

On August 12th the Washington Post reported that ADF, an “ISIS affiliate” in the Congo apparently, was “becoming deadlier”.

On August 13th it was reported ISIS was “deploying cryptocurrency to continue its reign of terror”.

Oh the humanity!

On August 14th the Iranian government officially blamed ISIS for an alleged terror attack on a shrine in Shiraz, and TimesNow reported that an ISIS “expert bomb maker” was planning an attack in India.

And just yesterday, The Mirror warned that ISIS and al-Qaeda were “back in Afghanistan”. Meanwhile Indonesian police raided a terror-suspects home and found an ISIS flag

The cherry on top is the UN releasing a report yesterday morning, warning that ISIS still posed “a serious threat”, with 5000-7000 fighters in Syria and Iraq. And in case anyone was curious, they also attempted an  explanation for  the lack of ISIS activity the last few years too. It wasn’t at all a result of the global elites having other (covid) fish to fry. No sir. It was a “deliberately adopted” strategy

to reduce attacks, in order to facilitate recruiting and reorganization.”

Keep reading

Say Goodbye to Permissionless Travel

Once upon a time, citizens of the United States could travel to almost every country in the European Union for 90 days without asking any government for permission beyond showing a passport at the initial point of entry. It was—and still is, for a few waning months—a marvelous if underacknowledged achievement for liberty.

Alas, the days of frictionless travel will soon be a memory. Starting at a so-far-unspecified date in early 2024, Americans and residents of 62 other countries that currently enjoy visa-free visitation to the Schengen Area of the E.U. will need to pay a fee and submit an online application (including biometric information, work experience, medical conditions, and initial itinerary), then pass a criminal/security background check, before enjoying that croissant in gay Paree. The grimly named European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) is projected to cost 7 euros per application and take up to 14 days to render a decision.

Before you start shaking your fist at freedom-hating Eurocrats, know that ETIAS is the belated continental answer to a system the U.S. has imposed on residents of friendly countries since 2009, called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, or ESTA. Like ETIAS, ESTA is a response to 21st-century terrorist attacks and combines modest fees ($21) with less-than-instantaneous turnaround times (a promised 72 hours). Both either tweak or torpedo (depending on your point of view) the notion of reciprocal “visa waiver” travel between high-trust countries.

U.S. passports have long been given the red carpet treatment worldwide, due to the country’s economic heft and traditional leadership role in negotiating down international barriers to the movement of people (and goods). That latter ethic began to deteriorate after the Cold War, with the rise of bipartisan anti-illegal immigration politics in the early 1990s, and then in earnest after Saudi nationals pulverized the World Trade Center with highjacked planes on September 11, 2001.

Keep reading

Following Disastrous War On Terror, US Vets Try To Stop Students From Joining Up

March 20 marked the 20th anniversary of the United States’ invasion of Iraq. The war took hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, with some estimates of Iraqi casualties putting the number at over 1 million. More than 4,600 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq during and after the invasion, and thousands more have died by suicide.

[Related, How Team Bush Escaped Justice Over Iraq and IRAQ 20 YEARS: Joe Lauria — Covering the ‘Vial Display’]

Meanwhile, and not coincidentally, the U.S. military is facing its worst recruitment crisis since the end of the Vietnam War. The Defense Department’s budget proposal for 2024 outlines a plan for the military to slightly cut back on its ranks, but to reach its projected numbers, it will still need to embark on a heavy recruitment push.

Across the country, anti-war veterans and their allies are working together in an effort to stop the U.S. military from reaching its goal.

We Are Not Your Soldiers is a project of New York City-based nonprofit World Can’t Wait. The organization sends military veterans into schools to share honest stories of the harm they have caused and suffered. In doing so, they hope to prevent young people from signing up.

“I wish I had somebody who told me when I was young,” says Miles Megaciph, who was stationed in Cuba and Okinawa with the U.S. Marine Corps from 1992 to 1996. “The experiences I’ve lived, as painful as they are, and as much as I don’t like to relive them, are valuable to help future adults not live those experiences,” Megaciph told me.

“We wanted to get to the people who were going to be the next recruits,” says Debra Sweet, the executive director of World Can’t Wait. When We Are Not Your Soldiers launched in 2008, the experience was often intense for veterans.

“They were all fresh out of Afghanistan and Iraq,” Sweet remembers. “It was very raw, it was very hard. [It was] really hard for them to go talk to people in public about what had happened. And we learned a lot about PTSD, up close and personal, and how it was affecting people.”

Keep reading

British intelligence in the dock for CIA torture

Recent developments raise the prospect that British intelligence agents could finally face justice for their little-known role in the CIA’s global torture program.

Britain’s foreign and domestic intelligence apparatus is facing scrutiny by a tribunal tasked with intelligence oversight. On May 26, London’s infamously opaque Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) unanimously issued a landmark ruling which means the complaints of two Saudis brutally tortured at CIA black sites and jailed for years in Guantanamo Bay can finally be heard, at least behind closed doors.

The British government insisted that the Tribunal, which explicitly examines wrongdoing by London’s security and intelligence agencies, did not have jurisdiction over the cases of Mustafa al-Hawsawi and Abd al-Rahim Nashiri. But the IPT disagreed.

Noting that “the underlying issues raised by this complaint are of the gravest possible kind,” the tribunal declared that “if the allegations are true, it is imperative that that should be established,” as “it would be in the public interest for these issues to be considered.”

The ruling means the Tribunal is likely to hear a complaint from Mustafa al-Hawsawi, who’s remained in US custody since American troops captured the man they claim is “a senior al-Qaida member” in 2003.

Al-Hawsawi bounced between CIA black sites for three years before being shipped to the US torture camp in illegally-occupied Guantanamo Bay in 2006. Along the way, he was subjected to brutal “enhanced interrogation” techniques, including rectal examinations conducted with “excessive force,” from which he was severely injured and reportedly suffers ongoing health problems to this day.

Lawyers for al-Hawsawi say they have proof that British intelligence agents illegally “aided, abetted, encouraged, facilitated, procured and/or conspired” with the US to torture and abuse their client.

Al-Hawsawi is one of just five remaining Guantanamo detainees to have been charged over alleged involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

According to the declassified summary of the US Senate report into CIA torture, al-Hawsawi was one of several prisoners held and abused “despite doubts and questions surrounding their knowledge of terrorist threats and the location of senior al-Qaeda leadership.”

Keep reading

Portland’s Multnomah County to give fentanyl users tin foil, straws, pipes to smoke drug

The county covering most of Portland, Oregon will be distributing tin foil and straws to fentanyl users in the city. 

According to a local report, the Multnomah County Health Department will be distributing the drug paraphernalia along with glass pipes for smoking meth and crack as well. Along with those, “snorting kits” will also be made available. 

The Oregon Legislature passed a bill that decriminalizes the distribution of drug paraphernalia if the materials are for harm reduction purposes.

It has not been signed into law by the governor of Oregon yet, however, residents of Portland have reportedly become frustrated about the situation with regards to drug use. Many reports have shown an increase in fentanyl overdoses as well as a growing number of residents wanting to bring back criminal penalties for the open use of drugs. 

Spokesman Sarah Dean, of Multnomah County, confirmed with Willamette Week that the policy to distribute the “smoking supplies” is new. Dean said that the rise of fentanyl being smoked instead of injected has decreased the demand for “harm reduction” services related to overdoses. 

Dean said handing users smoking supplies discourages them from injecting the drug, which is also a vector for disease. She stated, “Several decades of research have also shown that providing supplies for safer drug use does not increase illegal drug use.”

The amount of fentanyl in the county, according to Dean herself, has risen substantially. A policy that was going to criminalize and limit the use of fentanyl itself was dropped after being introduced by Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland just recently. 

Keep reading

Circle the Wagons: The Government Is On The Warpath

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”—Harry S. Truman

How many Americans have actually bothered to read the Constitution, let alone the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights (a quick read at 462 words)?

Take a few minutes and read those words for yourself—rather than having some court or politician translate them for you—and you will be under no illusion about where to draw the line when it comes to speaking your mind, criticizing your government, defending what is yours, doing whatever you want on your own property, and keeping the government’s nose out of your private affairs.

In an age of overcriminalization, where the average citizen unknowingly commits three crimes a day, and even the most mundane activities such as fishing and gardening are regulated, government officials are constantly telling Americans what not to do.

Yet it was not always this way.

It used to be “we the people” giving the orders, telling the government what it could and could not do. Indeed, the three words used most frequently throughout the Bill of Rights in regards to the government are “no,” “not” and “nor.”

Compare the following list of “don’ts” the government is prohibited from doing with the growing list of abuses to which “we the people” are subjected on a daily basis, and you will find that we have reached a state of crisis wherein the government is routinely breaking the law and violating its contractual obligations.

For instance, the government is NOT allowed to restrict free speech, press, assembly or the citizenry’s ability to protest and correct government wrongdoing. Nevertheless, the government continues to prosecute whistleblowers, persecute journalists, criminalize expressive activities, crack down on large gatherings of citizens mobilizing to voice their discontent with government policies, and insulate itself and its agents from any charges of wrongdoing (or what the courts refer to as “qualified immunity”).

The government may NOT infringe on a citizen’s right to defend himself. Nevertheless, in many states, it’s against the law to carry a concealed weapon (gun, knife or even pepper spray), and the average citizen is permitted little self-defense against militarized police officers who shoot first and ask questions later.

The government may NOT enter or occupy a citizen’s house without his consent (the quartering of soldiers). Nevertheless, government soldiers (i.e., militarized police) carry out more than 80,000 no-knock raids on private homes every year, while maiming children, killing dogs and shooting citizens.

The government may NOT carry out unreasonable searches and seizures on the citizenry or their possessions, NOR can government officials issue warrants without some evidence of wrongdoing (probable cause). Unfortunately, what is unreasonable to the average American is completely reasonable to a government agent, for whom the ends justify the means. In such a climate, we have no protection against roadside strip searches, blood draws, DNA collection, SWAT team raids, surveillance or any other privacy-stripping indignity to which the government chooses to subject us.

The government is NOT to deprive anyone of life, liberty or property without due process. Nevertheless, the government continues to incarcerate tens of thousands of Americans whose greatest crime is being poor and not white. The same goes for those who are put to death, some erroneously, by a system weighted in favor of class and wealth.

Keep reading

Eight Years of Corrosive Lies about Syria

We are told constantly that Donald Trump’s lies corrode the life of our Republic. Jacob Levy of the Niskanen Center invoked Hannah Arendt on the subject, and said that Trump uses lies the way authoritarians do, to demonstrate and expand their power, by “making his surrogates repeat the lies [he] compromised them; that tied them to him. And it degraded them, and made clear where power lay.” James Pfiffner of the Brookings Institute solemnly argued that Trump’s lies are different than past presidential fibs because Trump doesn’t try to equivocate, and that they thus “challenge the fundamental principles of the Enlightenment.”

I’m willing to give these arguments in the defense of truth-telling a great deal of time. The triviality of some presidential lies, they often tell us, is an aggravating factor. By lying trivially, and casually, the president demeans truth itself, which is suborned by power. All true, as far as it goes.

But, then I come across another story about Syria in the Wall Street Journal, suggesting that the United States may leave 1,000 troops in that country after all. The president, if you’ll remember, announced a complete withdrawal of troops from Syria months ago. Then, weeks later the White House announced that a small force of 200 would stay behind. Now, the Journal was reporting that it would actually be 1,000. A few hours later the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff said the original plan remained unchanged.

I realized that I no longer knew what to believe.

Consider three assertions routinely made about Syria by pundits, politicians, and policymakers: 1) Syria shows the perils of U.S. non-intervention; 2) We’re only in Syria to fight ISIS; and 3) U.S. withdrawal from Syria would mean handing a victory to Vladimir Putin.

All of the above statements have become conventional wisdom. The same people sometimes repeat more than one of them. And yet they are entirely irreconcilable with one another.

If withdrawing from Syria means handing a victory to Vladimir Putin, then we are doing something other than fighting ISIS there, something that certainly can’t be described as “non-intervention.”

One fact I do know: The CIA began the U.S. mission in the Syrian Civil War years before ISIS came into being, and a full year before President Obama began talking up his red lines and proposing a congressional vote to authorize intervention in Syria.

Keep reading

British police detain journalist Kit Klarenberg, interrogate him about The Grayzone

British counter-terror police detained journalist Kit Klarenberg upon his arrival at London’s Luton airport and subjected him to an extended interrogation about his political views and reporting for The Grayzone.

As soon as journalist Kit Klarenberg landed in his home country of Britain on May 17, 2023, six anonymous plainclothes counter-terror officers detained him. They quickly escorted him to a back room, where they grilled him for over five hours about his reporting for this outlet. They also inquired about his personal opinion on everything from the current British political leadership to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

At one point, Klarenberg’s interrogators demanded to know whether The Grayzone had a special arrangement with Russia’s Federal Security Bureau (FSB) to publish hacked material.

During Klarenberg’s detention, police seized the journalist’s electronic devices and SD cards, fingerprinted him, took DNA swabs, and photographed him intensively. They threatened to arrest him if he did not comply.

Klarenberg’s interrogation appears to be London’s way of retaliating for the journalist’s blockbuster reports exposing major British and US intelligence intrigues. In the past year alone, Klarenberg revealed how a cabal of Tory national security hardliners violated the Official Secrets Act to exploit Brexit and install Boris Johnson as prime minister. In October 2022, he earned international headlines with his exposé of British plans to bomb the Kerch Bridge connecting Crimea to the Russian Federation. Then came his report on the CIA’s recruitment of two 9/11 hijackers this April, a viral sensation that generated massive social media attention.

Among Klarenberg’s most consequential exposés was his June 2022 report unmasking British journalist Paul Mason as a UK security state collaborator hellbent on destroying The Grayzone and other media outlets, academics, and activists critical of NATO’s role in Ukraine.

Keep reading